The Removal of a Judge

There are times in defending a Colorado Criminal Case that the judge is biased or prejudicied against your client. Understanding when this occurs is critical because of the impact a judge can have on the jury or clearly at the time of sentencing if a jury verdict of guilty is returned. This page is intended to assist the public in understanding the standards and tests that arise out of the Colorado laws in this area.

The right to an impartial judge underpins the right to due process and a decision by a biased judge requires reversal.

Judges must meticulously avoid any appearance of partiality, not merely to secure the confidence of the litigants immediately involved, but to retain public respect and secure willing and ready obedience to their judgments.

A judge must not put her “partiality in question

Criminal Procedure Rule 21(b) and § 16-6-201 both direct that a judge shall be recused if he or she is in any way interested or prejudiced with respect to the case, the parties, or counsel. § 16-6-201 (d); Crim. P. 21 (b) (1) (IV).

The Colorado Code of Judicial Conduct

Judge’s are governed by their own very important Code Of Conduct – these “Canons” are as follows:

  • Canon 3(C)(1) of the Colorado Code of Judicial Conduct requires disqualification in any proceeding in which the judge’s “impartiality might reasonably be questioned. The disqualification of a judge is required where objective observer might wonder whether the judge could decide the case with the requisite aloofness and disinterest.
  • Rule 1.2 of Canon 1 states, “A judge shall act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the independence, integrity, and impartiality of the judiciary, and shall avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety.”
  • Rule 2.11 of Canon 2 states: (A) A judge shall disqualify himself or herself in any proceeding in which the judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned, including but not limited to the following circumstances:
    1. The judge has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party or a party’s lawyer, or personal knowledge of facts that are in dispute in the proceeding.
The Colorado Test for Disqualification ….

…is whether the motion and supporting affidavits allege sufficient facts from which it may reasonably be inferred that the judge is prejudiced or biased, or appears to be prejudiced or biased, against a party to the litigation. The test for recusal is objective.

Motions to Recuse Are Submitted to the Trial Judge

When considering a motion to recuse the court, a judge must confine her analysis to the four comers of the motion and supporting affidavits, and then determine as a matter of law whether they allege legally sufficient facts for disqualification.

The court must accept as true the facts stated in the motion and affidavits for disqualification of a judge.

Once facts have been set forth that create a reasonable inference of a “bent of mind” that will prevent the judge from dealing fairly with the party seeking recusal, it is incumbent upon the trial judge to recuse himself.

A trial judge must accept the affidavits filed with the motion as true, even though the judge believes that the statements contained in the affidavits are false or that the meaning attributed to them by the party seeking recusal is erroneous.

Colorado Rule of Civil Procedure – Rule 97

C.R.C.P. 97 provides:

A judge shall be disqualified in an action in which he is interested or prejudiced, or has been of counsel for any party, or is or has been a material witness, or is so related or connected with any party of his attorney as to render it improper for him to sit on the trial, appeal, or other proceeding therein.

A judge may disqualify himself on his own motion for any of said reasons or any party may move for such disqualification and a motion by a party for disqualification shall be supported by affidavit. Upon the filing by a party of such a motion all other proceedings in the case shall be suspended until a ruling is made thereon. Upon disqualifying himself, a judge shall notify forthwith the chief judge of the district who shall assign another judge in the district to hear the action. If no other judge in the district is available or qualified, the chief judge shall notify forthwith the court administrator who shall obtain from the Chief Justice the assignment of a replacement judge.

Client Reviews
"Mr. Steinberg provided my family with expert handling of my son's case. He took extra time understand the case, to consult with us during the pretrial proceedings, and to support him for a plea agreement. Mr. Steinberg is very knowledge about the law and very professional. He guided us in achieving the best possible outcome for my son. If I am ever in need of law services again, I will certainly have Mr. Steinberg handle my case. l also highly recommend his services to anyone that might be in need of an excellent defense attorney!" Tanya Witt
"I found myself in criminal trouble, that I wasn't guilty of and thanks to Mr. Steinberg's dedication and hard work, right before we we're looking at having to continue on to trial level Mr. Steinberg was able to use his vast knowledge of the law and his many respected years in the system to find a way to show my innocence. After a very unsure and somewhat difficult time for me, this very skilled and knowledgeable attorney was able to find the right path to take to reach a dismissal in my case. For that I can't tell you how much I appreciate his representation and his excellent understanding and helpful personality. He's a great man and an even better attorney but don't misunderstand him, he is an attorney not a therapist. Thanks H." Josh
"Working with Michael Steinberg was a wonderful experience. Truly people need to know that he is a expert in what he does. His personality is compassionate, intellectual, and down to earth. I glean that Michael is fun to be around. In the time I worked with him, it was a pleasure to be around him. As for my case, the outcome was amazing and couldn’t be better. He has made my life more manageable because of the outcome of my case. I’ve worked with other lawyers in the Denver area. He is superior to them all. If you’re in need of a lawyer and you come across Mr. Steinberg look no further he’s going to be the one you need. Thank you again Michael." Renee Taylor
Mr. Steinberg, It has been an honor working with you. I very much appreciated your style, demeanor, patience, and determination. I was well instructed in every step of the court process, and I felt that I received excellent guidance and timely information regarding my case. You have been extremely thoughtful with your time, and I was very impressed with your sensitivity in responding to my requests. Thank you. Anonymous